"Let no freedom be allowed to novelty, because it is not fitting that any addition should be made to antiquity. Let not the clear faith and belief of our forefathers be fouled by any muddy admixture."
-- Pope Sixtus III

Friday, June 30, 2017

The Infant-In-Chief is truly a wonder to behold, if you can stomach the stench. (It still refuses to wipe itself and they can't pay anyone else enough to do the job.)Can you imagine the horror-show of an upbringing it must have had?

There's no perfect way to parent, nor is there a single way to discipline a child. But parenting experts have studied discipline methods, so the Tribune asked them what they wish parents knew about disciplining their children.Regulate rather than discipline: For a long time, we believed that children were misbehaving when they acted out, said Carrie Contey, a human development specialist based in Austin, Texas. "We now know that when children are misbehaving, they're actually stress behaving, and they aren't rational at all times," Contey said. When children are tired or hungry or excited, their brain is in a state of stress. When they are a state of stress, the last thing they want is for someone to tell them to use their words. "The stress brain doesn't process words," Contey said. "We need to say, 'Wow, you are really having a hard time. I'm going to help you calm down.'" Instead of yelling, parents should literally get down to their child's level, communicate that they're not a threat to them and hold them if they want to be held.Prevention is best: Making emotional connections throughout the day will prevent bad behavior later. Contey said that touching and hugging children is incredibly important. Her rule: Eye-to-eye, skin-to-skin, heart-to-heart. This can be done for 20 minutes or 20 seconds, as long as the child knows that you hear him and he's safe. "It helps them not slip into the part of the brain that feels like he needs to be disciplined," Contey said.Use an inductive statement: Instead of yelling when a child does something wrong, you should say, "'I'm disappointed in that behavior because I know you're a caring person,'" said Michele Borba, a Palm Springs, Calif.-based educational psychologist and author of "UnSelfie." "The result is that the child is more likely to think about what he did, and more likely to be a caring person because he wants to please you."Problem-solve: Instead of putting a child into defense mode when he's done something wrong, it's more effective to problem-solve with him so he learns what he did wrong and doesn't do it again in the future, said Bonnie Harris, New Hampshire-based author of "Confident Parents, Remarkable Kids." For example, instead of yelling at him, you should say, "'You want this and I want that. How do we make this work for both of us?'" Harris said.Allow the child to experience the natural consequences: Parents get too involved and either fix the problem for their children or take on the problem as their own. If John hits Sam, the parent will typically yell at John or send him to his room. But the parent might not know what actually happened. John may have coped until he couldn't cope anymore, and he finally hit Sam. "If he is yelled at, he feels completely misunderstood, and nothing is learned," Harris said. The parent in that situation is simply setting the children up for their next fight. Instead, Harris said, allow John to experience what he did. He was impulsive and he hit Sam, but he probably didn't mean to do it. The parent can coach them by explaining that they both seem to be having a hard time. What do they both want to say to each other and how can they make amends?Be firm and kind: It's possible to do both, and this helps children see that you're being fair, said Vanessa Lapointe, Vancouver, British Columbia-based psychologist and author of "Discipline Without Damage." "For example, 'No, you can't go to that party,' and as the upset in the child sets in, you quickly move to, 'I know you are disappointed — I would be too if I were you,'" Lapointe said.Work with the children: Kids want to be part of the decision process, said John Duffy, Chicago-based psychologist and author of "The Available Parent." Duffy encourages parents to come up with three to five non-negotiable behavior issues, such as treating each other with respect, completing chores and finishing homework — and writing down the consequences for each infraction. "This way, there is precious little room for negotiation and manipulation, both of which kids today are experts with," Duffy said. "There is also little conflict, and the vast majority of the time spent between parent and child is positive, and does not involve discipline." Choosing too many behaviors to correct is anxiety-provoking for the entire family, and takes away from the emotional bank account that parents share with their children, Duffy said. So if your child's bedroom is a mess, but it doesn't really matter, then take a deep breath, close the door and walk away.

Sadly, small-dicked cretins like the Mess-iahdent do have to do something to get noticed.If you are a Clumpskyite, I guess you can take solace in the fact it no longer finds menstruation as fascinating as your average sixth grade boy.From The Old Gray Whore:

President Trump lashed out Thursday at the appearance and intellect of Mika Brzezinski, a co-host of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” drawing condemnation from his fellow Republicans and reigniting the controversy over his attitudes toward women that nearly derailed his candidacy last year.

Mr. Trump’s invective threatened to further erode his support from Republican women and independents, both among voters and on Capitol Hill, where he needs negotiating leverage for the stalled Senate health care bill.

The president described Ms. Brzezinski as “low I.Q. Crazy Mika” and claimed in a series of Twitter posts that she had been “bleeding badly from a face-lift” during a social gathering at Mr. Trump’s resort in Florida around New Year’s Eve. The White House did not explain what had prompted the outburst, but a spokeswoman said Ms. Brzezinski deserved a rebuke because of her show’s harsh stance on Mr. Trump.

The tweets ended five months of relative silence from the president on the volatile subject of gender, reintroducing a political vulnerability: his history of demeaning women for their age, appearance and mental capacity.

“My first reaction was that this just has to stop, and I was disheartened because I had hoped the personal, ad hominem attacks had been left behind, that we were past that,” Senator Susan Collins, a moderate Republican from Maine who is a crucial holdout on the effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act, said in an interview.

“I don’t think it directly affects the negotiation on the health care bill, but it is undignified — it’s beneath a president of the United States and just so contrary to the way we expect a president to act,” she said. “People may say things during a campaign, but it’s different when you become a public servant. I don’t see it as undermining his ability to negotiate legislation, necessarily, but I see it as embarrassing to our country.”

A slew of Republicans echoed her sentiments. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who, like Ms. Collins, holds a pivotal and undecided vote on the health care bill, tweeted: “Stop it! The presidential platform should be used for more than bringing people down.”

Senator Ben Sasse, a Nebraska Republican who opposed Mr. Trump’s nomination during the presidential primaries, also implored him to stop, writing on Twitter that making such comments “isn’t normal and it’s beneath the dignity of your office.”

Senator James Lankford, Republican of Oklahoma, added, “The president’s tweets today don’t help our political or national discourse and do not provide a positive role model for our national dialogue.”

Ms. Brzezinski responded by posting on Twitter a photograph of a box of Cheerios with the words “Made for Little Hands,” a reference to a longstanding insult about the size of the president’s hands. MSNBC said in a statement, “It’s a sad day for America when the president spends his time bullying, lying and spewing petty personal attacks instead of doing his job.”

Mr. Trump’s attack injected even more negativity into a capital marinating in partisanship and reminded weary Republicans of a political fact they would rather forget: Mr. Trump has a problem with the half of the population more likely to vote.

Christine Matthews, a Republican pollster who specializes in the views of female voters, said the president’s use of Twitter to target a prominent woman was particularly striking, noting that he had used only one derogatory word — “psycho” — to describe the show’s other co-host, Joe Scarborough, and the remainder of his limited characters to hit upon damaging stereotypes of women.

“The continued tweeting, the fact that he is so outrageous, so unpresidential, is becoming a huge problem for him,” she added. “And it is particularly unhelpful in terms of building relationships with female Republican members of Congress, whose votes he needs for health care, tax reform and infrastructure.”

But it was unclear whether the vehemence of the president’s latest attack would embolden members of his party to turn disdain into defiance.

Senior Republicans, including Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, cycled through what has become a familiar series of emotions and calculations after the Twitter posts, according to staff members: a flash of anger, reckoning of possible damage and, finally, a determination to push past the controversy to pursue their agenda.

“Obviously, I don’t see that as an appropriate comment,” the House speaker, Paul D. Ryan, said during a Capitol Hill news conference. Then he told reporters he wanted to talk about something else.

Representative Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, demanded an apology, calling the president’s Twitter posts “sexist, an assault on the freedom of the press and an insult to all women.”

A spokeswoman for the president, Sarah Huckabee Sanders, urged the news media to move on, arguing during the daily White House briefing that Mr. Trump was “fighting fire with fire” by attacking a longtime critic.

Ms. Brzezinski had called the president “a liar” and suggested he was “mentally ill,” added Ms. Sanders, who defended Mr. Trump’s tweets as appropriate for a president.

Melania Trump, the president’s wife — who has said that, as first lady, she will embark on a campaign against cyberbullying — also rejected claims that her husband had done what she is charged with undoing.

“As the first lady has stated publicly in the past, when her husband gets attacked, he will punch back 10 times harder,” Mrs. Trump’s spokeswoman wrote in a statement, referring to the first lady’s remarks during the campaign.

Current and former aides say that Mr. Trump was chastened by the furor over the “Access Hollywood” tape that emerged in October, which showed him bragging about forcing himself on women, and that he had exhibited self-restraint during the first few months of his administration. But in the past week, the sense that he had become the victim of a liberal media conspiracy against him loosened those tethers.

Moreover, Mr. Trump’s oldest friends say it is difficult for him to distinguish between large and small slights — or to recognize that his office comes with the expectation that he moderate his behavior.

And his fiercest, most savage responses have almost always been to what he has seen on television.

”Morning Joe,” once a friendly bastion on left-leaning MSNBC, has become a forum for fiery criticism of Mr. Trump. One adviser to the president accused the hosts of trying to “destroy” the administration over several months.

After lashing out at Mr. Scarborough and Ms. Brzezinski at one point last summer, Mr. Trump told an adviser, “It felt good.”

Even before he began his campaign two years ago, Mr. Trump showed a disregard for civility when he made critical remarks on television and on social media, particularly about women.

He took aim at the actress Kim Novak, a star of 1950s cinema, as she presented during the 2014 Academy Awards, taking note of her plastic surgeries. Chagrined, Ms. Novak later said she had gone home to Oregon and not left her house for days. She accused Mr. Trump of bullying her, and he later apologized.

As a candidate, Mr. Trump was insensitive to perceptions that he was making sexist statements, arguing that he had a right to defend himself, an assertion Ms. Sanders echoed on Thursday.

After the first primary debate, hosted by Fox News in August 2015, Mr. Trump trained his focus on the only female moderator, Megyn Kelly, who pressed him on his history of making derogatory comments about women.

He told a CNN host that Ms. Kelly had “blood coming out of her wherever,” leaving Republicans squeamish and many thinking he was suggesting that Ms. Kelly had been menstruating. He refused to apologize and kept up the attacks.

Later, he urged his millions of Twitter followers to watch a nonexistent graphic video of a former Miss Universe contestant, Alicia Machado, whose weight gain he had parlayed into a media spectacle while he was promoting the pageant.

Mr. Trump went on to describe female journalists as “crazy” and “neurotic” on his Twitter feed at various points during the race. He derided reporters covering his campaign, Katy Tur of NBC and Sara Murray of CNN, in terms he rarely used about men.

His tweets on Thursday added strain to the already combative daily briefing, as reporters interrupted Ms. Sanders’s defense of the president to ask how she felt about them as a woman and a mother.

Senate Republican leaders considered keeping one of former President Barack Obama's big tax increases on wealthier Americans and using the money to fatten proposed subsidies for the poor in a bid Thursday to placate moderate GOP lawmakers and salvage their struggling health care bill.With a core priority tottering, top Republicans also assessed an amendment pushed by conservatives to let insurers offer plans with low premiums and scant benefits. To do so, a company would also have to sell a policy that abides by the consumer-friendly coverage requirements in Obama's 2010 statute, which the GOP is struggling to repeal.Both proposals were encountering internal Republican opposition, and it was uncertain either would survive. But the effort underscored how Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., needed to mollify both wings of his divided party if he's to rescue one of his and President Donald Trump's foremost campaign promises.McConnell postponed a vote on an initial version Tuesday, forced by conservative and moderate GOP senators prepared to block it.By Friday, McConnell wants to add changes to the bill that would assure its passage after Congress' week-long July 4 recess. For him to prevail, no more than two of the 52 GOP senators can oppose the measure.But as senators charged out the Capitol's doors Thursday to begin their break, there were no overt indications that GOP leaders had resolved their problems."We're kind of at a stalemate right now, I'd say," said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va., who with Ohio GOP Sen. Robert Portman and others want to forestall reductions the measure would make in Medicaid. Discussions about easing those cuts were continuing, but progress so far was "not enough for me," said Sen. Dean Heller, R-Nev.The Medicaid program for low-income and disabled people has grown dramatically in their states and others, but the Republican bill would cut it, with reductions growing over time.Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said that while GOP leaders might have a package in hand Friday, "I'm not confident that's going to, kind of, solve everybody's concerns."Vice President Mike Pence met in the Capitol on Thursday with Capito, Heller and other GOP dissidents, including Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Texas' Ted Cruz.The Senate bill would repeal most of the tax boosts Obama levied, around $700 billion over the coming decade. They were aimed largely at high earners and the medical industry and helped finance his expansion of coverage to about 20 million people.Under a proposal by Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., the bill would retain Obama's 3.8 percent tax increase on investments by higher earners. Keeping that increase would save $172 billion over 10 years, and moderates want to use it to make the health care subsidies their bill would provide more generous.Democrats say the GOP bill is mostly a tax cut for the rich. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said the Senate measure would raise out-of-pocket health care costs for many low earners while producing 22 million more uninsured people by 2026.Corker said he was "very confident" that leaders would address the issue in the updated bill. He said cutting upper-income taxes and increasing health care costs for the poor "is not an equation that works.""Obviously we'd like to get rid of all" of Obama's tax boosts, said No. 3 Senate GOP leader John Thune of South Dakota. "But if it takes something like that to get our members on board to move this process forward, I think we have to consider that."Conservatives said they opposed the idea, along with the chairmen of Congress' two tax-writing committees: Senate Finance chairman Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and House Ways and Means chairman Kevin Brady, R-Texas.Obama's health law enacted an additional 3.8 percent tax on investment income for married couples making more than $250,000 a year and individuals making more than $125,000.Also in play was the proposal by Cruz to let insurers offer skimpier policies, which conservatives say would lower premiums.Moderates oppose that, especially if it lets insurers raise premiums on people with pre-existing medical problems. No. 2 GOP leader John Cornyn of Texas suggested the proposal might not survive because Senate rules won't allow it on the bill.The leader of the conservative House Freedom Caucus suggested the Senate bill would be doomed if it excluded something like Cruz's plan or House-approved provisions letting insurers charge higher prices to people with serious diseases. Many expect the House to try for quick passage of any health care bill the Senate approves, foregoing potential problems of negotiating a bicameral compromise."Is failure an option? Absolutely not," said Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C. "Is failure on the doorstep knocking? Absolutely. So we've got to make sure we don't answer that door."SET US FREE, YOU IMBECILE!Republicans also said party leaders agreed to add $45 billion for battling opioids abuse to their bill. They were also considering a proposal by conservatives to let people use tax-advantaged health savings accounts to pay health care premiums.

A spying scandal in Mexico widened Thursday after it was confirmed by experts that several of the country’s top opposition leaders — along with journalists and human rights advocates — were targeted by high-tech spyware exclusively sold to governments.The Internet watchdog group Citizen Lab exposed the scandal this month in a report that showed that spyware known as Pegasus had been used in recent years to infiltrate the cellphones of 12 prominent journalists and rights activists, all of whom had been critical of the Mexican government.The victims received messages with links to the same malware, which, when activated, allows outsiders to remotely access a phone’s data as well as activate its camera and microphone.On Thursday, the group said the spyware had been used against members of the conservative National Action Party, or PAN, which had asked Citizen Lab to investigate suspicious messages received by several of top members. Although Citizen Lab did not say who it believes was responsible for the spying, the group said that around the time the victims’ phones were targeted, Congress was debating anti-corrpution legislation.

In its first report, Citizen Lab said those who had been sent the link to the malware were all government critics. Among them was the prominent investigative journalist Carmen Aristegui, who led a team in 2014 that reported the wife of Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto had benefited from a real estate deal with a builder who had received some of the country’s top construction contracts.

NSO Group, the Israeli company that makes the spyware, says it sells its product only to government agencies for the purpose of fighting criminals and terrorists.

Last week, Peña Nieto acknowledged that Mexico had purchased the spyware, but he denied the government had ordered the surveillance. He promised an investigation into who was behind what may be the biggest domestic espionage scandal in Mexico’s history.The emails with links to the malware included messages designed to trick the recipients into opening the attachments.

“Senator, my friend, my husband just died,” said one Pegasus message sent to PAN Sen. Roberto Gil Zuarth. “I am sending you information about the wake.” The link actually enabled a download for the malware.

“Good morning President,” said another message, sent to PAN leader Ricardo Anaya. “I’m sharing this report … about you that is going viral.”

Anaya said at a news conference this month that none of the PAN members clicked on the links because they found them suspicious.

“There’s a level of viciousness that I was not expecting,” the presidential daughter and senior White House official told Fox News this week, adding that she was “blindsided” by the “ferocity.”

The poor dear.

Here are a few sources the blindsided footwear magnate might consult to understand why things are so vicious:

●Her brother Eric. The previous week, he called the head of the Democratic Party a “total whack job” and declared that “morality is just gone” from Democrats. “To me, they’re not even people,” he said.

●Her brother Donald Jr. On Wednesday, after the shooting at the Republican congressional baseball team practice, the president’s son retweeted with approval a claim tying the shooting to “NY elites glorifying the assassination of our President.”

●Newt Gingrich. On Thursday, the informal Trump adviser and surrogate tweeted a conspiracy claim that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III “is now clearly the [tip] of the deep-state spear aimed at destroying or at a minimum undermining and crippling the Trump presidency.”

●Her dad. The president on Thursday went on yet another Twitter tirade. He declared himself the victim of the “single greatest WITCH HUNT in American political history — led by some very bad and conflicted people!” And he renewed his attack on his vanquished opponent, saying, “Crooked H destroyed phones w/hammer.”

This is why Washington is so vicious right now. (Actually, sweetie, the Clumpskyites haven't started shooting. Yet. Hodgkinson was a left-fascist like you. I'm just sayin'... - F.G.) Plenty bad before Trump’s campaign and presidency, it has gotten markedly worse. This is what happens when the president and his surrogates portray opponents as immoral, subhuman and criminal, when they hack away at the courts, the press and other pillars of a free society — and when they promote conspiracy theories suggesting American justice is tainted.

In attacking Mueller, Trump is attacking the man whom George W. Bush named to head the FBI and who was selected for his current role as special counsel by the deputy attorney general Trump himself appointed. And everybody should react with cheerful goodwill when these honorable public servants are defamed, said to be part of a “deep state” conspiracy?

It was sickening that a lunatic apparently converted his hatred of Trump this week into violence, shooting House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) and others on a baseball diamond. The would-be assassin’s act — the ultimate assault on the rule of law — is the antithesis of principled opposition to Trump.

Revolting in a different way is the speed with which a few on the right have tried to use the shooting to delegitimize the justifiable and widespread anger that Trump has generated. Rush Limbaugh called the gunman “a mainstream Democrat voter.” Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said of the shooting: “I do want to put some of this at the feet of Barack Obama.” Sean Hannity of Fox News, broadcasting from the scene of the shooting, alleged a “record level of vicious left-wing hate,” claiming this is the “biggest issue we have to face as a country.”

Some have gone in search of precedent to justify this attempt to smear Trump’s opposition by blaming it for a madman’s bullets. A writer for the conservative Washington Examiner falsely claimed this week that in 2011 I “blamed” Sarah Palin for the shooting that injured then-Rep. Gabby Giffords (D-Ariz.) and killed others. In fact, I wrote then that “there’s no evidence that either Palin or [Glenn] Beck inspired the Tucson suspect” but that they both deserved to be “held to account for recklessly playing with violent images.” Now, as then, nobody but the shooter is to blame for a depraved act, but we all should be careful with violent language and imagery that could be misconstrued by the unhinged.NEWS FLASH! Dana Milbank demands that all in Hollyweird be shot to save the republic!That is obviously a fake news headline from Dimbart. (If anybody ever deserved to come back as a ghost and haunt the crap out of the perverts who have ruined his good name, it is Mr. Breitbart.) Dana is an ignorant cow who doesn't know we are supposed to live in a republic.

Kathy Griffin’s severed Trump head was grotesque. Though I doubt those who watch Shakespeare performed by the Public Theater in New York are violence-prone, (WTF? The Bard is all about the ultra-violence. Political assassinations are everywhere. Read a freakin' book, Dana! - F.G.) I wouldn’t have cast the assassinated Julius Caesar as Trump-like. As The Post’s David Weigel noted this week, many of the alleged calls to violence by the left have been misrepresented. But when they happen, they should be roundly denounced.

The deep and broad anger with Trump, however, has nothing to do with this. Part of it comes naturally from being out of power: Liberals were more vitriolic late in the Bush years, conservatives were nastier during Obama’s presidency, and the pendulum is swinging again.

But now there’s a new variable: The president himself is stoking fear and fury. Seven months after the election, he is still attacking Hillary Clinton as a criminal. He is frightening allies, attacking the courts, discrediting the intelligence community and the “fake news media” and suggesting there’s a major conspiracy against him in the justice system.

This recklessness causes enormous fear, which generates the “ferocity” Ivanka Trump perceives. President Trump could calm the anger — if he could calm himself.Time for a new label, kiddies. None Dare Call It Sin!

The pastor of a fundamentalist congregation that eschews modern medicine will stand trial on a charge he should have alerted authorities when his two-year-old granddaughter was dying of pneumonia last year, a judge ruled on Wednesday.District Judge Ann Young said prosecutors put on enough evidence to send the case against Rowland Foster to the Berks County Courthouse in Pennsylvania for trial, reversing another judge’s decision in April to throw out the charge of failure to properly report suspected child abuse.Young called the death of Ella Foster “tragic, sad, beyond belief” and told Rowland Foster she was not questioning his religious beliefs.THAT is why I would make a lousy judge.Her decision came after watching a video of statepolice questioning the Foster, 72, but she said an important part of her decision was testimony at the previous preliminary hearing by Dr Neil Hoffman, a forensic pathologist.Hoffman did not testify Wednesday, but Young drew from the transcript of the earlier hearing in which he said Ella’s condition would have been easily treatable and if she had been treated she almost certainly would have survived.Young called Hoffman’s testimony “clear, convincing and compelling.”

Foster, of Lebanon, ignored questions as he left the hearing, but his defence attorney, Chris Ferro, said prosecutors will have difficulty getting a conviction at trial, which will require a more stringent level of proof than was needed before Young.“I think the commonwealth is going to be unable to prove the charge beyond a reasonable doubt,” Ferro said.Prosecutor Jonathan Kurland argued to the judge that Ella had been subjected to child abuse and that her grandfather, as a pastor, was required by law to report suspected abuse and willfully failed to do so.“Dr Hoffman testified (that) in the morning before she died it would have been apparent to a reasonable person that Ella was in need of medical care and medical intervention,” Kurland said.He said Foster’s comment to a detective that he has never been to a doctor was evidence of “rationalisation and justification and awareness.”Ferro called his client “a grieving grandfather, not a criminal,” and said Ella’s death was “a crater in the heart of the community.”Ella was being cared for before she died, Ferro said, including being given food and liquids.“This is not a mandatory reporter who is turning his blind eye to child abuse,” Ferro said.No, he is an old, proud fool who killed his granddaughter because he thinks wrong things are right things and has neverdoubted that he knows the truth.Heck, even mohammedans take their kids to doctors, don't they?TheChurchMilitant: Sometimes anti-social, but always anti-fascist since 2005.

There are a handful of possibilities here:First, the language of Love spoken by the Church may not be translatable into the language spoken by the ChristLast Media. (Very Possible)Second, the Pope and the Church's hierarchy have forgotten (or never learned) the lesson of Vatican II, namely that left-fascists will take even the clearest and simplest of words and twist them to achieve their diabolical agenda. (Also very possible.)Third, Pope Francis is clueless about the true nature of the forces that threaten the souls of men. (Doubtful)Fourth, Pope Francis purposefully uses vague language so as not to upset anyone. (Possible, and sad if true.)

Four conservative cardinals who publicly questioned Pope Francis’ opening to divorced and civilly remarried Catholics are pressing their case and arguing that the issue is dividing the Catholic Church.In a new letter, the cardinals ask Francis for an audience, noting he never responded to their written request for clarification in September.Francis published “Joy of Love” last year, opening the door to letting civilly remarried Catholics receive Communion. Church teaching says these Catholics must either obtain an annulment of their first marriage or abstain from sex, if they want to receive Communion.Since then, bishops and bishops’ conferences around the world have issued different interpretations of what Francis wrote. More conservative bishops have reaffirmed traditional church teaching on the indissolubility of marriage; others have taken Francis’ opening and gone further. The bishops of Malta, for example, said sometimes it might be “humanly impossible” for the new couple to abstain from sex.Seriously? These guys are celibate, right? They KNOW it is humanly POSSIBLE.In the new letter, published by the blog of veteran Vatican journalist Sandro Magister, the cardinals lamented: “How painful it is to see this — that what is sin in Poland is good in Germany, that what is prohibited in the archdiocese of Philadelphia is permitted in Malta.”You see, kiddies, "catholic" is supposed to mean universal.“Faced with this grave situation, in which many Christian communities are being divided, we feel the weight of our responsibility, and our conscience impels us to ask humbly and respectfully for an audience,” said the letter, dated May 6 and signed by Cardinal Carlo Caffarra, emeritus archbishop of Bologna, on behalf of the other three.Francis hasn’t responded, though he has made clear that he wants his church to show a more merciful and less rigid face for Catholics facing difficult family situations. That said, on Wednesday he made clear that marriage is forever.In his weekly Wednesday catechism lesson, Francis noted that the nuptial Mass invokes the help of saints to help newlyweds live as a married couple forever. “Not like some say ‘as long as love lasts.’ No: Forever! Otherwise it’s better to not get married. Either forever or nothing,” he said.

Four U.S. Senators stand between we the people and the federal takeover of healthcare becoming the Repansycans' responsibility. The totalitarians only need to buy off two of them.Pay no attention to the left-fascist whining. They know damn well that single-payer fascism is within their grasp, as soon as the Orange Infant goes away.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell explored options for salvaging the battered Republican health care bill Wednesday but confronted an expanding chorus of GOP detractors, deepening the uncertainty over whether the party can resuscitate its bedrock promise to repeal President Barack Obama’s overhaulMcConnell, short of votes, unexpectedly abandoned plans to whisk the measure through his chamber this week, fresh GOP critics popped forward. Some senators emerged from a party lunch saying potential amendments were beyond cosmetic, with changes to Medicaid and Obama’s consumer-friendly insurance coverage requirements among the items in play.“There’s a whole raft of things that people are talking about, and some of it’s trimming around the edges and some of it’s more fundamental,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La. “Right now, they’re still kind of, ‘Can we do it?’ and I can’t answer that.”Yet while this week’s retreat on a measure McConnell wrote behind closed doors dented his reputation as a consummate legislative seer, no one was counting him out.“Once in Glacier National Park I saw two porcupines making love,” said Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan. “I’m assuming they produced smaller porcupines. They produced something. It has to be done carefully. That’s what we’re doing now.”Having seen the House approve its health care package in May six weeks after an earlier version collapsed, Democrats were far from a victory dance.“I expect to see buyouts and bailouts, backroom deals and kickbacks to individual senators to try and buy their vote,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. “What I don’t expect to see, yet, is a dramatic rethink of the core” of the bill.Facing a daunting equation — the bill loses if three of the 52 GOP senators oppose it — the list of Republicans who’ve publicly complained about the legislation reached double digits, though many were expected to eventually relent. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said “of course” his support was uncertain because he wants to ease some of the measure’s Medicaid cuts, and Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., told The Omaha World-Herald that the bill was not a full repeal, adding, “Nebraskans are dissatisfied with it and so am I.”McConnell, R-Ky., wants agreement by Friday on revisions so the Senate can approve it shortly after returning in mid-July from an Independence Day recess. Several senators scoffed at that timetable, with McCain saying, “Pigs could fly.”At the White House, Trump continued his peculiar pattern of interspersing encouragement to GOP senators trying to tear down Obama’s 2010 statute with more elusive remarks.Trump told reporters that Republicans have “a great health care package” but said there would be “a great, great surprise,” a comment that went without explanation. On Tuesday, he said it would be “great if we get it done” but “OK” if they don’t, and two weeks ago he slammed as “mean” the House version of the bill that he’d previously lionized with a Rose Garden ceremony.The GOP’s health care slog has highlighted discord between moderates who say the bill cuts Medicaid and federal health care subsidies too deeply, and conservatives eager to reduce government spending and shrink premiums by letting insurers sell policies with scantier coverage than Obama’s law allows.GOP support for the measure sagged this week after a report by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimated that it would produce 22 million fewer insured people by 2026 while making coverage less affordable for many, especially older and poorer Americans. It wasn’t helped when an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll said that 17 percent of people approved of the Senate bill.McConnell showed no signs of abandoning his push for the legislation.“We’ll continue working so we can bring legislation to the floor for debate and ultimately a vote,” he said as the Senate convened Wednesday.

A man accused of ramming and toppling a Ten Commandments monument less than 24 hours after it was installed insisted on representing himself at his first court appearance Thursday morning and interrupted the judge, who said the allegations “shocked” him.Michael Tate Reed, 32, of Van Buren was arrested by Arkansas Capitol police Wednesday on charges of defacing objects of public respect, trespassing on Capitol grounds, both misdemeanors, and first-degree criminal mischief, a felony.Reed appeared Thursday morning in Pulaski County District Judge Wayne Gruber’s courtroom via a video feed from the Pulaski County jail. When he approached the camera, Reed appeared calm but then had to be muted as he exclaimed, “My Lord, my God” multiple times and told his public defender he did not need her services.Public defender Peggy Egan told the judge there may be some “mental health concerns” regarding Reed. She asked Gruber not to consider similar allegations against Reed in a different state before she requested a $10,000 bond.Reed was previously accused of destroying a Ten Commandments monument in Oklahoma in a similar fashion, after which he was hospitalized for mental evaluation and treatment, according to the Tulsa World.As Egan was speaking, Reed continued to interrupt her. Only snippets of what he said could be heard inside the courtroom. Gruber told Reed not to make any remarks that could be used against him at a later date."Listen to Ms. Egan. She's very, very well versed in the law, very, very experienced in criminal law. Let her speak on your behalf, please," he said.The prosecuting attorney ran through the claims against Reed as well as his previous convictions on drug possession and driving while intoxicated. The state requested a $100,000 bond.After listening to both attorneys, Gruber told the courtroom, “I’ve listened to the allegations. Frankly, they shock me.”“I'm reminded of a much more serious offense, that being the praying folks in the Charleston church who were slaughtered by a gunman," the judge said, referring to the 2015 massacre of nine people in South Carolina.“The allegations are simply allegations. They must be proven beyond reasonable doubt," Gruber said. "But they are very, very serious allegations.”He placed Reed on a $100,000 bond. Reed was then led out of the hearing room at the jail by correctional officers. His next court date was scheduled by Gruber for Sept. 7.The Ten Commandments monument was erected after a legislative push by Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Bigelow. He sponsored a 2015 law to install the Christian monolith on Capitol grounds and helped raise $26,000 in private donations.According to police, around 4:45 a.m., an officer watched a dark vehicle start from a stopped position and ram the monument. Reed appeared to stream a video of himself charging the 6-foot-tall statue online, officials said.In a Facebook Live video posted to an account under the name Michael Reed, a driver flips on his headlights and shouts, “Freedom!” as he barrels toward the stone. When contact is made, the video cuts out.In another Facebook video, a man who called himself Michael Reed told viewers that he was a “firm believer that part of salvation is that we not only have faith in Jesus Christ but we obey the commands of God, and that we confess Jesus as Lord.” "But one thing I do not support is the violation of our constitutional right to have the freedom that's guaranteed to us, that guarantees us the separation of church and state,” the man said. On the account, he describes himself as a “born again Christian” and a “Jesus Freak.”The granite monument, which was placed next to a walkway connecting the Capitol to the Arkansas Supreme Court, laid fractured on the pavement Wednesday morning. Crews carted off the debris as reporters swarmed the scene and passersby snapped photos.Rapert said at a news conference the replacement monument has already been ordered. It will resemble the toppled one and might be protected by steel posts surrounding it, he said."We want to put up monuments in every state, every county, every city and every town. And every organization that wants one, we're going to help them do that," Rapert said.

I have no idea if Cardinal Pell is guilty of these charges or not, and neither do you. What we as Catholics need to face is the fact that for decades the Church allowed homosexuals and other sexual deviants to become priests because there was a "shortage" of priests. She is now reaping the whirlwind.If the priesthood attracts an inordinate number of men interested in sodomizing children and concealing their sexual desires, wouldn't you think it appropriate to insist on more stringent vetting of all prospective priests? Why don't we ask the Holy Ghost, kiddies?The Catholic Church has spent too many damn decades trying to prove she is "relevant" to the rest of the world. The world sure sees her as relevant now, huh?It is high time the One, True Church got back to the business of saving souls. An excellent place to start would be with the poor benighted souls of those priests who betray their vows and their God by raping kids.

Pope Francis suffered a major blow Thursday when his top financial adviser, Cardinal George Pell, was charged in his native Australia with multiple counts of sexual assault from years ago, bringing a criminal case in the long-running abuse scandal inside the frescoed walls of the Vatican for the first time.The 76-year-old Pell - the highest-ranking Vatican official ever implicated in the scandal - forcefully denied the accusations and took an immediate leave of absence as Vatican finance czar to return to Australia to defend himself."The whole idea of sexual abuse is abhorrent to me," Pell told reporters in the Vatican press office. "News of these charges strengthens my resolve, and court proceedings now offer me an opportunity to clear my name."The pope thanked him for his "honest" work and collaboration, and set about trying to ensure that the financial reforms he had entrusted to Pell would continue in his absence.But the case creates a thorny image problem for the pope, who has already suffered several credibility setbacks in his promised "zero tolerance" policy about sex abuse in the worldwide scandal.In 2014, Francis won cautious praise from victims' advocacy groups when he created a commission of outside experts to advise him and the broader church about the "best practices" to fight abuse and protect children.But the commission has lost much of its credibility after its two members who were survivors of abuse left in frustration. Francis also scrapped the commission's signature proposal - a tribunal to hear cases of bishops who covered up for abuse - after Vatican officials objected.That one of his top advisers now stands charged with abuse himself increases the pressure on Francis to get the abuse commission back on track and press ahead with the financial reforms that he was elected pope to enact."It's a big crisis for Pope Francis, because Cardinal Pell was the man he called from Sydney to Rome to reform the Vatican finances," noted Christopher Lamb, correspondent for the British Catholic magazine, The Tablet. "Pope Francis has said 'zero tolerance' for abusers, that he was going to sack bishops who cover up, but at the same time there have been number of cases where he's been accused of having not taken strong enough action."Notably, Francis didn't force Pell to resign his post. He has said he would wait for Australian justice to run its course before making a judgment himself.The developments also posed a new obstacle for Francis as he tries to overhaul the Vatican bureaucracy and bring its finances up to international accounting and transparency standards.If the case drags on, he will be pressed to ensure that the economy secretariat can work effectively. Reforms already were strained by Pell's repeated clashes with the Italian-dominated bureaucracy, mired by delays, resistance and the complexity of bringing order to the Vatican's financial fiefdoms.Just last week, one of Pell's top allies, the Vatican auditor general, resigned without explanation two years into a five-year term, raising questions about whether the reform effort was doomed.The charges against Pell were announced in Melbourne by Victoria state Police Deputy Commissioner Shane Patton, who said the cardinal - Australia's senior Catholic - was ordered to appear in court July 18 to face multiple counts of "historical sexual assault offenses" - meaning offenses that generally occurred some time ago. Patton said there are multiple complainants against Pell, but he gave no other details.Vatican spokesman Greg Burke said the Holy See had learned with "regret" of the charges and that the work of Pell's office would continue in his absence, albeit only its "ordinary" affairs.In a statement he read to reporters while sitting next to Pell, Burke said the Vatican respected Australia's justice system but recalled that the cardinal had "openly and repeatedly condemned as immoral and intolerable" acts of sexual abuse against minors.He noted Pell's cooperation with Australia's Royal Commission investigation of sex abuse and that as a bishop in Australia, he worked to protect children and compensate victims.Pell said he intends to return to Rome eventually to resume his work as prefect of the Vatican's economy ministry.The Vatican said Pell would not participate in any public liturgical events during his leave. The charges came while many of the world's cardinals were in Rome for a ceremony a day earlier to elevate five new cardinals, and Pell did not participate in a Mass in St. Peter's Square on Thursday.For years, Pell has faced allegations that he mishandled cases of clergy abuse as archbishop of Melbourne and, later, Sydney. But more recently, Pell himself became the focus of a clergy sex abuse investigation, with Victoria detectives flying to the Vatican to interview him last year.It is unclear what allegations the charges announced Thursday relate to, but two men, now in their 40s, have said that Pell touched them inappropriately at a swimming pool in the late 1970s, when Pell was a senior priest in Melbourne.Pell's actions as archbishop came under scrutiny in recent years by a government-authorized investigation into how the Catholic Church and other institutions have responded to the sexual abuse of children. The Royal Commission found shocking levels of abuse in Australia's Catholic Church, revealing that 7 percent of priests were accused of sexually abusing children in the past several decades.Last year, Pell testified to the commission that the church had made "enormous mistakes" in allowing thousands of children to be raped and molested by priests. He conceded that he, too, had erred by often believing the priests over victims who alleged abuse. He vowed to help end a rash of suicides that has plagued church abuse victims in his hometown of Ballarat.But he also became something of a scapegoat in Australia for all that went wrong with how the church handled the scandal.Marie Collins, an Irish survivor of abuse who resigned from the pope's advisory commission in March, said Pell never should have been promoted to his Vatican job, given how he mishandled abuse cases in Australia. It was, she said in a statement, "a slap in the face to all those he had let down so badly, not only victims but Catholic people who have spent years now hearing assurance from the Catholic Church that it is taking the issue seriously."Proving the charges may be difficult. The prosecution must prove the sex offenses occurred beyond a reasonable doubt, which can be difficult when so much time has passed, said Lisa Flynn, national manager of Shine Lawyers' abuse law practice in Australia.It was unclear if Pell would face a church trial stemming from the accusations. The Vatican has clear guidelines about initiating a canonical investigation if there is a semblance of truth to sex abuse accusations against a cleric. In the case of a cardinal, it would fall to Francis himself to judge. Penalties for a guilty verdict in a church trial include defrocking.Sydney Archbishop Anthony Fisher stood by Pell, calling him "a man of integrity in his dealings with others, a man of faith and high ideals, a thoroughly decent man."He added that the archdiocese wouldn't be paying Pell's legal bills.Anne Barrett Doyle of BishopAccountability.org, an online archive of clerical sex abuse documents, said she was surprised by the charges "simply because of their boldness.""While Pell undeniably is the poster boy for the Australian church's wrongdoing, false allegations are relatively rare," she said in an email.

About Me

First of all, the word is SEX, not GENDER. If you are ever tempted to use the word GENDER, don't. The word is SEX! SEX! SEX! SEX! For example: "My sex is male." is correct.
"My gender is male." means nothing. Look it up.
What kind of sick neo-Puritan nonsense is this? Idiot left-fascists, get your blood-soaked paws off the English language. Hence I am choosing "male" under protest.